From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: by 10.142.164.20 with SMTP id m20cs257812wfe; Wed, 15 Jun 2011 08:54:07 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.52.99.106 with SMTP id ep10mr1010667vdb.46.1308153247239; Wed, 15 Jun 2011 08:54:07 -0700 (PDT) Return-Path: Received: from rubyforge.org (rubyforge.org [205.234.109.19]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id e19si1188836vdu.136.2011.06.15.08.54.05; Wed, 15 Jun 2011 08:54:06 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of sup-devel-bounces@rubyforge.org designates 205.234.109.19 as permitted sender) client-ip=205.234.109.19; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of sup-devel-bounces@rubyforge.org designates 205.234.109.19 as permitted sender) smtp.mail=sup-devel-bounces@rubyforge.org Received: from rubyforge.org (rubyforge.org [127.0.0.1]) by rubyforge.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B533E1218273 for ; Wed, 15 Jun 2011 11:54:05 -0400 (EDT) Received: from masanjin.net (masanjin.net [209.20.72.13]) by rubyforge.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E7B791D780FA for ; Wed, 15 Jun 2011 11:02:33 -0400 (EDT) Received: from w by masanjin.net with local (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1QWrl5-0000dw-5s for sup-devel@rubyforge.org; Wed, 15 Jun 2011 15:11:55 +0000 From: William Morgan To: sup-devel In-reply-to: References: <1308071162-sup-7051@masanjin.net> Date: Wed, 15 Jun 2011 15:11:54 +0000 Message-Id: <1308150597-sup-6406@masanjin.net> User-Agent: Sup/git Subject: Re: [sup-devel] Tokyo Cabinet fails with invalid record header X-BeenThere: sup-devel@rubyforge.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list Reply-To: Sup developer discussion List-Id: Sup developer discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: sup-devel-bounces@rubyforge.org Errors-To: sup-devel-bounces@rubyforge.org Reformatted excerpts from Horacio Sanson's message of 2011-06-14: > Interesting.... yesterday I started again to sync my gmail account > but this time using ruby1.8.7 instead of ruby1.9.1 and without any > hooks configured and it finished without problems. I think the problem > is the hooks so I will rerun again with ruby 1.9.1 but without the > hooks. There is a difference in how strings are marshalled between Ruby 1.8 and 1.9, and you will obviously get different strings if you tokenize differently, but if either of these two changes is the difference, it's a bug in TC. One option is to write some Ruby bindings to LevelDB and try that, but it would be a bunch of work, would require C++0x which means every OS X user would be complaining all the time, etc etc. Not sure if I want to go down that route. -- William _______________________________________________ Sup-devel mailing list Sup-devel@rubyforge.org http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/sup-devel